’WPC` 7# UN %k 0cqŌ 0§Ü 0Dƒw|Ē4CW 0Jf 0T° 0^ {cb 0hÅ {(- 0rU 0|Ē 0†C 0É 1uY 0dĪ 0@2 D3r B„ U>Ā B) AQ) Ęz 0D@ 0D„ D/Č B÷ DC AMWU*¤cĪÅ1öv~vӍ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHĪ(ČhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(;/$””Ń!1ŃŃ!1ŃŌ€>&č@>XXŌ(W(3!$¤¤Ż ƒ/!ŻŃ!°ŃŃ!°ŃŌ€>f¼>XXŌŻ  Żą  ąņņŚ  Ś0Ś  Śóó(#Ć$ņņŚ  Ś0Ś  ŚóóNDOUPUQaRDSDTaUaVUWUXVYDZD[D\D]U_v`PaӀmŒƒ*#ę3|xm2 ’’0Indent1Ō2ŌŌ3  Ō2" ’’0Indent2ą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2, ’’0Indent3ą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō(;?@$””ŃęĢŃŃęĢŃŌ€1 (1XXŌ26 ’’0Indent4ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō($””2@ ’’0Indent5ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2J ’’0Indent6ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2T ’’0Indent7ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2^ ’’0Indent8ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō ’’?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ’’8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ("’’$££Ņ  ŅŅ  Ņ$$$$'’’dxd d< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d*+ ,-Cž’<< C’’ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3Æ$¢¢Ż ƒ!ŻŻ  Ż($$””ņ ņŚ  Ś1Ś  Śó ó..'÷’ dxdü’P Pd((((7Border 1dd* /Cž’ << G’’< Œ 9p`(Arial YŻ ƒ!ŻŃ  ŃŃ#€d#ŃŌ€'ŌŃ ! ŃŃ ! ŃŌ€'&ŌŻ  ŻŻ ƒ+"ŻŻ  ŻŌ€1ŌŌ€1ŌÓ  ÓŌ YYY ŌFILEDŌ€1XŌĢĢņ ņSeptember€18,€1997ĢĢCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ĢŌ€1ōŌAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó »Ż ƒ!ŻŃ  ŃŃ#€d#ŃŌ€'ŌŃ ! ŃŃ ! ŃŌ€'&ŌŻ  ŻŻ ƒ$Żą ąņņŚ  ŚŚ  ŚóóŻ  ŻRule€10€(Rules€of€the€Court€of€Appeals€of€Tennessee).€Ģ(a)€ņ ņAffirmance€Without€Opinion.ó 󀀀The€Court,€with€the€concurrence€of€all€judges€participating€in€theĻcase,€may€affirm€the€action€of€the€trial€court€by€order€without€rendering€a€formal€opinion€when€anĻopinion€would€have€no€precedential€value€and€one€or€more€of€the€following€circumstances€exist€andĻare€dispositive€of€the€appeal:Ģą ą(1)€the€Court€concurs€in€the€facts€as€found€or€as€found€by€necessary€implication€by€the€trialĻcourt.ą ąĢą ą(2)€there€is€material€evidence€to€support€the€verdict€of€the€jury.Ģą ą(3)€no€reversible€error€of€law€appears.€Ģą ąSuch€cases€may€be€affirmed€as€follows:€š šAffirmed€in€accordance€with€Court€of€Appeals€ĢRule€10(a).ššĢ Ż ƒ!ŻŃ  ŃŃ#€d#ŃŌ€'ŌŃ ! ŃŃ ! ŃŌ€'&ŌŻ  ŻŻ ƒ$Żą ąņņŚ  ŚŚ  ŚóóŻ  ŻJohnsonššs€wife,€Daphne€Johnson,€is€also€an€appellant€in€this€case.ĢPtPtHHŚ(’į’āłFG(üHHŚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆŠ ŠŠHHŠŠ  ŠŠ2ŠŠ’’øę$’ŠŠHHŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ  ŠŠ ŠŠ ŠŃŃŃGenevaŃŃ ŃŃ € ŃŃ<Px–ČŃŅŅŅ443!#4ŅŅ$ *$ŅŅ$*$ŅŅ ’KK ŅŅ  Geneva ŅŅ  Geneva ŅÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßŃGenevaŃŃ ŃŅ  h HD: Geneva ŅŅ  h HD: Geneva ŅŻ ƒ!ŻŌ . ŌŌ€'ŌŃ ! ŃŃ ! ŃŌ€'&ŌŻ  ŻŌT€Ō›Ń\R AŲ'\ŃÓ  ÓŃ\R AŲ'\ŃŃ7€¼×XdšdČ7ŃŃ  ќ›Ž ŽĢĢą@ ąņ ņIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEĢą@ ąWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSON̜ĢMILAM›€CONSTRUCTION,€CO.,€INC.,ą ą)ą ąó óFrom€the€Chancery€Courtņ ņĢ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ą ąą ą€ą ąą ą)ą ąó ófor€Henderson€County,€Tennesseeņ ņĢą ąPlaintiff/Appellee,ą ąą ąą ą)ą ąó óThe€Honorable€Joe€C.€Morris,€Chancellor€€€€ņ ņĢvs.ą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ąĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ąó óHenderson€Chancery€No.€8936ņ ņĢMICHAEL€B.€JOHNSON,€SR.,€andą ąœą ą)›ą ąó óAppeal€No.€02A01„9608„CH„00185ņ ņ€€€ĢWife,€DAPHNE€S.€JOHNSON,ą ąą ą)ą ąĢœŁ€*ŁßR€02/A1-j|ķ¼` Å `€€@’Rߛ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ą ąą ą€€€€€€€€€€€€€ą ąą ą)ą ąAFFIRMEDĢą ąDefendants/Appellants.ą ąą ą)ą ąĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ąó óFrankie€K.€Stanfillņ ņĢą ąą ąą ą€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ą ąą ą)ą ąó óLexington,€TennesseeĢ€€€€€€€€€€€€ą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņ ņ)ó óą ąAttorney€for€Defendants/AppellantsĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņ ņ)Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ąó óBill€R.€Martin€€€€ņ ņ€ó 󀀀€€€€€€€€€€€€Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņ ņ)ą ąó óLexington,€Tennessee€€Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņ ņ)ą ąó óAttorney€for€Plaintiff/Appellee€ņ ņĢņņ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ĢĢą@ ąóóRULE€10€ORDER€Ģņņ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ĢœÓÓóóó óĢ›ą ąThis€matter€appears€appropriate€for€consideration€pursuant€to€Rule€10(a)€of€the€Rules€of€theĻCourt€of€Appeals€of€Tennessee.× ƒ3 ××  ×Ģą ąIn€this€case,€Appellant€Michael€B.€Johnson€(š šJohnsonšš)× ƒ4 ××  ׀and€Appellee€Milam€ConstructionĻCompany€œ(š šMilam€Constructionšš)›€entered€into€a€written€contract€for€the€construction€of€a€home,€forĻa€contract€price€of€$75,500.€€Johnson€deposited€$500€into€escrow.€€During€construction,€JohnsonϜapproached€Jerry›€œMilam€(š šMilamšš),€President€of€Milam€Construction€Company,›€with€a€request€forĻadditional€work,€which€œMilam€estimated›€could€be€done€for€$6,000.€€Milam€and€Johnson€orally€agreedĻfor€œMilam€Construction›€to€do€this€additional€work.€€Subsequently,€Johnson€requested€œMilamĻConstruction›€to€perform€other€additional€work.€€The€cost€of€all€of€the€additional€work€€totaledĶ$16,347.70.̜›ą ąAt€the€time€of€the€closing€on€the€house,€$40,000€had€been€paid€on€the€contract.€œMilamĻConstruction›€was€not€represented€at€the€closing.€€€Johnson€then€sent€œMilam€Construction›€a€check€forĻŃ ° ŃŃ ° Ń$35,000.€€œMilam€Construction›€refused€the€$35,000€check€because€it€did€not€include€the€charges€forĻthe€additional€work;€œMilam€Construction›€did€not€œwant›€acceptance€of€the€œcheck€to€be›€deemed€anĻacceptance€of€it€as€complete€and€final€payment.€€Johnson€later€paid€œMilam€Construction›€$23,394.52,Ļleaving€an€unpaid€balance,€according€to€œMilam€Construction,›€of€$28,453.18.Ģą ąœMilam€Construction›€sued€for€quantum€meruit,€and€Johnson€filed€a€counterclaim,€allegingĻdamages€arising€from€numerous€construction€defects.€€At€the€bench€trial,€Johnson€presented€evidenceĻthat€these€defects€would€cost€$29,700€to€remedy.€€œMilam€Construction›€presented€evidence€that€it€hadĻcorrected€the€problems€of€which€Johnson€complained.€€œMilam€also›€testified€œthat,€while›€theĻconstruction€was€in€progress,€Johnson€had€inspected€the€work€almost€daily.€€œMilam€Construction›Ļasserted€that€Johnson€did€not€complain€about€the€quality€of€the€construction€until€he€was€given€theĻbill€for€the€extra€work€performed.€€œMilam€Construction›€€introduced€into€evidence€an€itemized€list€ofĻthe€additional€charges€over€and€above€the€contract€œprice.€€After›€the€trial,€the€trial€court€entered€aĻcursory€order€awarding€œMilam€Construction›€a€judgment€for€the€sum€of€$28,453.18,€on€the€basis€ofĻquantum€meruit.€€Johnsonššs€counterclaim€for€the€cost€of€correcting€the€alleged€defects€was€dismissed.€ĻJohnson€now€appeals€this€order.Ģą ąOn€appeal,€Johnson€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€awarding€œMilam€Construction›Ļquantum€meruit€damages€without€an€off„set€for€correcting€the€alleged€construction€defects.Ģą ąOur€review€of€this€case€is€ņ ņņņde€novoó óóó€upon€the€record€with€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€theĻfindings€of€fact€by€the€trial€court.€€Absent€error€of€law,€the€trial€courtššs€decision€will€be€affirmed,Ļunless€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€factual€findings.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d).€Ģą ąFrom€our€examination€of€the€record,€we€concur€in€the€facts€as€found€by€necessary€implicationĻby€the€trial€court,€and€we€find€no€reversible€error€of€law.€Ģœ›ą ąTherefore,€the€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€in€accordance€with€Court€of€Appeals€RuleĻ10(a).€€Costs€are€assessed€against€the€Appellants,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.̜ÓÓĢ›ą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņņ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņ ņóóHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.Ģ̜ĢCONCUR:ņņĢ›ĢĢ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ĢóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ĢĢņņĢ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóĢALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ó ó